D&D General Designing Morality Systems

[CleverNickName]

The YouTube channel "Extra Credits" recently posted a video about how morality systems in games; specifically how they are structured in tabletop RPGs. And of course, one of the main examples given was our favorite tabletop RPG, Dungeons & Dragons...specifically its alignment system. And since alignment and morality are sort of a hot topic on these boards lately, I wanted to share it and invite discussion.


Extra Credits defines three different types of morality systems in games:

Restrictive Morality (which limits a character's options toward a goal as if they are locked into a specific code, thus creating conflict). D&D, Star Wars, and Star Trek are the examples cited in the video.

Contradictory Morality (conflict arises from characters not being able to uphold all aspects of their morality at the same time). Pugmire RPG is the example used here.

Cumulative Morality (when past actions define a character's moral code slowly over time, which changes/limits/frustrates future options.) Mass Effect is the example the video uses.

What are your thoughts? Do you have a favorite? Do you wish D&D used a different system?

 

[Scribe]

Cool, I'll take a look after work.

 

[payn]

I've always used all of these in D&D. I think the alignment shift is an oft overlooked element of the system. I've seen D&Ders believe themselves locked into their alignment, even tho in non-D&D RPGs with no alignment, they take a more cumulative or contradictory approach naturally. So, I guess I love alignment in D&D, and wish folks where more flexible with it. I blame some mechanical applications of the past that made this a PITA to RP at the table.

 

[CleverNickName]

I've always used all of these in D&D. I think the alignment shift is an oft overlooked element of the system. I've seen D&Ders believe themselves locked into their alignment, even tho in non-D&D RPGs with no alignment, they take a more cumulative or contradictory approach naturally. So, I guess I love alignment in D&D, and wish folks where more flexible with it. I blame some mechanical applications of the past that made this a PITA to RP at the table.

Ugh, I know right? How many of us have had a Dungeon Master tell us bluntly "You wouldn't do that, you're Lawful Good." Grrr.

Personally, I'd love to see rules for cumulative morality in D&D. Whenever your character makes a major decision (like capturing the villain alive and returning him to the magistrate instead of slaying him for the reward money) your alignment/morality/whatever-you-call-it shifts a step closer to one of the four major axis points. Certain options/plot arcs/challenges would then unlock, depending on how far you had advanced. Black market unlocks with a Chaos score of 8, free healing at the temple unlocks with Good 5, etc.

Star Wars had something similar to this, back in the day, where your decisions could affect how far to the Dark Side your character had drifted. It was an interesting mechanic, but I think it would be difficult to adapt to D&D.

 

[Charlaquin]

The YouTube channel "Extra Credits" recently posted a video about how morality systems in games; specifically how they are structured in tabletop RPGs. And of course, one of the main examples given was our favorite tabletop RPG, Dungeons & Dragons...specifically its alignment system. And since alignment and morality are sort of a hot topic on these boards lately, I wanted to share it and invite discussion.


Extra Credits defines three different types of morality systems in games:

Restrictive Morality (which limits a character's options toward a goal as if they are locked into a specific code, thus creating conflict). D&D, Star Wars, and Star Trek are the examples cited in the video.

Contradictory Morality (conflict arises from characters not being able to uphold all aspects of their morality at the same time). Pugmire RPG is the example used here.

Cumulative Morality (when past actions define a character's moral code slowly over time, which changes/limits/frustrates future options.) Mass Effect is the example the video uses.

What are your thoughts? Do you have a favorite? Do you wish D&D used a different system?

Haven’t watched the video yet, but based on this summary, I don’t think restrictive morality is the right category for D&D alignment. I would peg traditional D&D alignment dynamics as contradictory - the old “forcing the Paladin to choose between being Lawful and being Good” trap illustrates this. And then, of course, alignment in 5e isn’t really any of these. It’s pretty intentionally designed to avoid being a cause of conflict, which is why I feel it no longer has any point. My preference though, when I use alignment, is for it to be cumulative morality. One act of evil doesn’t make a character evil, but many such acts might over time.

 

[Scribe]

I'm playing Wrath of the Righteous currently and it has a nice graphical representation of your alignment, and a running track of every alignment impacting choice you have made over the campaign.

It's a great way of showing how Alignment can function.

 

[Shiroiken]

Outside of 1E, which had penalties for not following your listed alignment, I've only really cared about it for divine casters (cleric, paladin, and druid). There were only a handful of mechanics that would affect alignment, so I'd go with whatever was listed. However, I'd only very rarely require a change to alignment, usually only after a series of events that showed the character was inappropriately listed.

 

[Blue Orange]

Dragonlance had an alignment tracking chart back in the day--too many good or evil actions would shift you in that direction.

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

I'm not terribly comfortable with a game defining morality at me. I like Black-and-White morality just fine, but I like it as a genre trope rather than a defined system.

 

[Minigiant]

I use Wrestling Morality.

Your morality is not based on whether you keep or break a code but how cool or boring you are doing it.